2
2 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Timing Tenure and Promotion files: – Candidates can request that their file be considered in Candidacy 1. This request is likely made to the unit Chair or Chair of the Adjudicating Committee. – Files must be prepared in Candidacy 2. For each candidate, the Adjudicating Committee will name two members to a File Preparation Committee (FPC) and each candidate will be asked to name one member.

3
3 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Timing, continued When to start preparing a tenure and promotion file – it is recommended that file preparation commence (the FPC be established) the January preceding the academic year in which the file will be considered Adjudicating Committee’s recommendation on T&P: – must be communicated to candidate by 1 November of year in which the file is considered “Deny” decision on tenure files: –President’s decision must be made and candidate notified by June 30 Appointments on dates other than July 1 –normally for these candidates, the schedule commencing the next July 1 will apply

4
4 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Timing - continued Promotion to Full Professor/Senior Lecturer files – This application is always at the option of the candidate. – This request is likely made to the unit Chair or Chair of the Adjudicating Committee. – While the T&P timelines don’t apply, the rest of the file preparation is generally the same.

5
5 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Timing - continued Solicitation of referees: Teaching: Collegial referees – – should attend classes well prior to the end of the winter term. – must ensure coverage of all relevant teaching formats. Student referees – – best to solicit before end classes. Professional Contribution & Standing: – best to solicit prior to conference, summer vacation season.

6
6 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Candidate’s responsibilities Name one member to the File Preparation Committee Provide c.v., and continue to update it during the process Provide the (optional) personal statement at beginning of process, so that it can be sent to referees Provide copies of scholarly work Provide copies of reviews of work, if available Identify referees in all three areas – limited number It is in the candidate’s best interests to work closely with the FPC to ensure that all relevant information is presented in the clearest manner.

7
7 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Preparing the file The first job of the File Preparation Committee is to draw up lists of potential referees. The committee uses the candidate’s c.v. to help it identify the relevant referees. The committee then consults with the candidate as to additional names of referees to be added to the list. For both tenure and promotion and promotion to Full Professor files, the FPC solicits letters of reference on: Teaching: 3 collegial referees + students + grad students supervised by candidate Professional Contribution and Standing: minimum of 3 referees, external to York and at arm’s length from the candidate. It is suggested that referees be asked disclose any relationship they may have with the candidate. Service: normally not more than 3 references

8
8 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Preparing the file - continued Letters of solicitation should provide guidance as to what the referees are being asked to judge and what standards they are expected to apply. Comment must also be solicited from co-authors/co-investigators on the nature of the candidate’s contribution to joint work. Letters may be sent and received by e-mail. If there is no electronic signature, then the e-mail which accompanied the reference letter, clearly indicating the sender, must be included in the file.

9
9 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What gets sent to the referees? All referees (except students) are sent: Curriculum vitae Candidate’s (optional) personal statement A copy of the University Tenure and Promotions Policy, Criteria and Procedures and/or Unit standards for tenure and promotion PC&S referees are also sent: Copies of the candidate’s scholarly work (e.g. articles, book chapters, excerpts from books, work in progress) Other materials which the candidate deems relevant

10
10 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What gets sent to the referees(2)? Collegial teaching referees are also sent: Course outlines Assignments Handouts Teaching dossier (optional) Other materials which the candidate deems relevant Service referees are also sent: Materials which the candidate deems relevant

11
11 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What goes in the file Curriculum vitae - updated as necessary Personal statement (optional) – normally no more than 2000 words Summaries of citation counts might also be included University criteria/unit-level standards Dean’s letter and Adjudicating Committee report on Advancement to Candidacy

12
12 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What goes in the file – Teaching Teaching documentation – Collegial letters of reference Collegial referees should cover all teaching formats and comment on all material, not just teaching performance in class. – Statistical summaries Should be clear and include comparative data. Do not include page after page of raw data. – Signed student comments from teaching evaluations, if any. – Student letters Should be systematically solicited with coverage across levels and formats.

13
13 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What goes in the file – PC&S Referees’ letters: Rarely more than 5 or 6. ALL PC&S referees must be at arm’s length from the candidate. Statements from co-authors/collaborators on the nature of the candidate’s contributions to joint work. Published reviews of scholarship/creative production, if available. Some candidate’s provide summary citation counts.

14
14 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What goes in the file – Service Referees’ letters: Rarely more than 3 letters are required. Referees are normally internal to the University. New in the 2009-12 YUFA Collective Agreement is a specific reference to “service to the external community (e.g., service to aboriginal communities) demonstrably relevant to the University’s academic priorities.”

15
15 York University Secretariat – April 2010 File Contents (Section F.3.1.5.) In addition, as a minimum, each file will include: List of referees whose letters are included (indicate which selected by candidate) Brief bios or c.v.s of the PC&S referees. The status of the referees should be clear (i.e., Associate Professor, Full Professor). Sample copies of letters to solicit references

16
16 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What doesn’t go in the file Unsigned student comment. Anonymous comment/letters. Course outlines and assignments. Copies of the candidates scholarly work.

17
17 York University Secretariat – April 2010 FPC Commentary The FPC provides contextualizing commentary about the file, but does not adjudicate it. Such commentary could include: how and why the referees were chosen explanation for the choice of any non-arm’s-length referees, as allowed for in the Policy relevant information about the appointment (e.g., studio/studies) explanation for any substantial delays in assembling the file B.2. “in cases where there may be division within a discipline, the File Preparation Committee should describe the nature of the conflict among schools of thought and present the Adjudicating Committee with a wider range of professional opinion.” The commentary completes the preparation of the file.

18
18 York University Secretariat – April 2010 FPC Commentary, continued The commentary does not: Summarize the evidence. Tell the Adjudicating Committee how to view parts of the evidence. Make a recommendation on the file.

19
19 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Organization of file Completed application form in every copy of the file. The file is complete once File Preparation Committee commentary is added – ANYTHING that comes after is added on top of that, not re-sorted into the various categories. Why is this important? We have to know what it was that the referees saw when they wrote their letters. If, for example, a c.v. is updated, it needs to be clear whether the update was considered by the Adjudicating Committee, the Dean or only the Review Committee. The original remains in the file.

20
20 York University Secretariat – April 2010 Organization of file - continued The file should be organized in such a way as to make it easy for committees to find material. – Table of contents – Page numbers Copies of the file should be numbered for sign-out by committee members. Once the AC has made its recommendation, all copies of the application form should be updated.

21
21 York University Secretariat – April 2010 The complete file Section F.2.3.: Candidates shall have the right to review their complete file at any stage subject to the exceptions outlined in F.3.1.6. Confidentiality and the Candidate’s Right to Know. This means that candidates can see all material in their files except the original letters with signatures; i.e. they can see who wrote and what was written, but not who wrote what. Once the file is complete, many units prepare a copy for the candidate with all identifiers removed from the letters and comments.

22
22 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What’s next? The Adjudicating Committee (AC) makes the principal substantive assessment of the file. It prepares a report which is full and balanced, giving detailed reasons for its recommendation. In its report the AC must clearly make the case for its decision, demonstrating how the evidence in the file support the recommendation. The file is then forwarded to the Dean. The Dean’s letter of transmittal to Review Committee outlines his/her recommendation, either Concurs with Adjudicating Committee recommendation, or Dissents and gives reasons.

23
23 York University Secretariat – April 2010 What’s next (2)? The Review Committee determines if: a) the procedures have been followed in all material respects b) the appropriate criteria have been fairly applied; and c) the judgement of the AC concerning application of University standards is correct. If yes, it concurs with the decision of the Adjudication Committee and forwards the file to the President. If yes to a) and b), but the evidence in the file does not support the conclusion of the AC, it dissents from the decision of the Adjudicating Committee and forwards the file to the President. If no to a) or b), then it will refer the file back to the Adjudicating Committee.